2010 CalWORKs Survey Report                            December 1, 2010Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family ...
Page intentionally left blank to facilitate two-sided printing.
Table of Contents                                                                                                         ...
Introduction1BIn June, 2010 the Sonoma County Human Services Department conducted a written surveyof CalWORKs clients to b...
Methodology3BBased on the findings from the literature, Sonoma County developed a client survey thatasked about 42 unique ...
The survey was conducted in June, 2010. All CalWORKs clients visiting the office at 2225Challenger Way in Santa Rosa and s...
Survey Client Demographics5B                    Gender                                           Work Required            ...
Results6B90% of CalWORKs clients report three or more barriers to self sufficiency.In the literature, it is clear that TAN...
Race                                   7B                                             Age                                 ...
Combinations of Barriers1BThere are no common combinations of barriers that are faced by Sonoma CalWORKs clients.Clients r...
Page intentionally left blank for double-sided printing.2010 CalWORKs Survey Report                                       ...
Employment Barriers12B96% of CalWORKs clients report barriers to self sufficiency related to employment.Danziger (2001)7 c...
In some cases these barriers are experienced differently by different groups of clients.13BThese statistically significant...
Education Barriers17B62% of CalWORKs clients report barriers to self sufficiency related to education.The effectiveness of...
In some cases these barriers are experienced differently by different groups of clients.18BThese statistically significant...
Housing Stability Barriers23B61% of CalWORKs clients report barriers to self sufficiency related to housing stability.An i...
In some cases these barriers are experienced differently by different groups of clients.24BThese statistically significant...
Stressful Experiences Barriers27B59% of CalWORKs clients report barriers to self sufficiency related to recent stressful e...
In some cases these barriers are experienced differently by different groups of clients.28BThese statistically significant...
Resource Barriers32B58% of CalWORKs clients report barriers to self sufficiency related to resources.Mulia (2008) states, ...
In some cases these barriers are experienced differently by different groups of clients.3BThese statistically significant ...
Child Wellbeing Barriers37B48% of CalWORKs clients report barriers to self sufficiency related to child wellbeing.Maternal...
In some cases these barriers are experienced differently by different groups of clients.39BThese statistically significant...
Personal and Family Health Barriers43B45% of CalWORKs clients report barriers to self sufficiency related to personal and ...
In some cases these barriers are experienced differently by different groups of clients.4BThese statistically significant ...
Findings and Practice ImplicationsThese findings and practice implications were developed with, and represent a consensusa...
FINDING 3: Housing stability is clearly a barrier for many CalWORKs clients. 61% of clientsreport one or more housing stab...
References1. Anderson, S., Halter, A., & Gryzlak, B. (2004). Difficulties after leaving TANF: Inner-   city women talk abo...
13. Kalil, A., & Dunifon, R. (2007). Maternal work and welfare use and child well-being:    Evidence from 6 years of data ...
27. Saad, L. (April 16, 2010). Making Ends Meet is a Threshold for Personal Wellbeing.    Gallup. Retrieved May 20, 2010, ...
9.      Well-Being Questionnaire (2010)        Reader’s Digest        rd.com10.     California Well-Being Studies: SSI Par...
Appendix A: Towns included in each Region Central          Santa Rosa                  Rohnert Park                  Cotat...
Appendix B: All Responses by Percent Did Not Answer                                                                       ...
CalWORKs Survey Report (2010)
CalWORKs Survey Report (2010)
CalWORKs Survey Report (2010)
CalWORKs Survey Report (2010)
CalWORKs Survey Report (2010)
CalWORKs Survey Report (2010)
CalWORKs Survey Report (2010)
CalWORKs Survey Report (2010)
CalWORKs Survey Report (2010)
CalWORKs Survey Report (2010)
CalWORKs Survey Report (2010)
CalWORKs Survey Report (2010)
CalWORKs Survey Report (2010)
CalWORKs Survey Report (2010)
CalWORKs Survey Report (2010)
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

CalWORKs Survey Report (2010)

382

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
382
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "CalWORKs Survey Report (2010)"

  1. 1. 2010 CalWORKs Survey Report December 1, 2010Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way. -Leo Tolstoy in Anna Karenina- Karen Fies, Director Employment and Training Services Division 707.565.8501 Marla Stuart, Director Planning, Research and Evaluation Division 707.565.5849With gratitude to the following HSD employees (listed alphabetically) who made this project a success! All SonomaWORKS staff!Rocio Alvarez Tammy LarimoreSherry Alderman Crystal MartinJared Ball Kelly LoydHope Hamby George Malachowski
  2. 2. Page intentionally left blank to facilitate two-sided printing.
  3. 3. Table of Contents PageIntroduction ................................................................................................................1Literature Review .........................................................................................................1Methodology ................................................................................................................2Response Rate .............................................................................................................3Demographics ..............................................................................................................3Results .......................................................................................................................5 Employment Barriers ................................................................................9 Education Barriers ....................................................................................11 Housing Stability Barriers ..........................................................................13 Stressful Experiences Barriers ....................................................................15 Resource Barriers .....................................................................................17 Child Wellbeing Barriers ............................................................................19 Personal and Family Health Barriers ...........................................................21Findings and Practice Implications ..................................................................................23References ..................................................................................................................25 Wellbeing Surveys Reviewed ...............................................................................27Appendices Appendix A: Towns Included in Each Region .........................................................29 Appendix B: All Responses by Percent Did Not Answer ...........................................30 Appendix C: All Responses by Gender ..................................................................31 Appendix D: All Responses by Client Age..............................................................32 Appendix E: All Responses by Race/Ethnicity ........................................................33 Appendix F: All Responses by Region ...................................................................34 Appendix G: All Responses by Required to Work ...................................................35 Appendix H: Survey...........................................................................................36
  4. 4. Introduction1BIn June, 2010 the Sonoma County Human Services Department conducted a written surveyof CalWORKs clients to better understand client and family wellbeing and its relationship tosuccessfully achieving self sufficiency. Although researchers have identified both system andpersonal barriers to employment among TANF recipients, this study focused only onSonoma County CalWORKs client descriptions of personal barriers that, in their own view,prevent them being self sufficient.Literature Review2BAn examination of TANF client self-reported barriers to self-sufficiency is important becauseresearch shows that TANF caseworkers are often not fully aware of the barriers faced by aclient. Ovwigho (2008) examined the extent to which employment barriers that areperceived by clients themselves and revealed to a person outside the “welfare system” aresimilar or different to those barriers reported to or perceived by a TANF caseworker.Ovwigho (2008) found that both clients and workers perceived child care and healthproblems as the primary barriers to employment. However, as illustrated in the table below,the rates of these and other problems as perceived by clients themselves are higher thanthey report to or are perceived by their TANF caseworker – with the exception of substanceabuse.21 Understanding self-perceived barriers to self-sufficiency can help the SonomaCounty CalWORKs program to deliver the most appropriate services.Self-reported barriers to employment compared to caseworker notes (N=819) Reported by TANF Noted by caseworkerBarrier recipient to researcher in TANF case notesChild care 37% 10%Transportation 26% 2%Housing instability 14% 5%Physical health 29% 16%Mental health 16% 5%Child physical health 15% 6%Any substance abuse 3% 9%Domestic violence 8% 3%Adapted from TABLE 3 in Ovwigho, Saunders, Born (2008). Barriers to IndependenceAmong TANF Recipients: Comparing Caseworker Records and Client Surveys, p. 87. The link between well-being and self-sufficiency is also important. The literature identifies the following 7 elements of well-being that are important to TANF client’s ability to successfully leave welfare and support their family: employment, education, housing stability, stressful experiences, resources, child well-being, and personal and family health. Each of these factors, including relevant research findings, is discussed in the results section of this paper. Former Mexican President Vincente Fox highlights the value of listening to people’s experiences related to well-being (Mendes & Ray, 2010). “When we know the real aspirations of people; what they consider being well, then governments can shape budgets to provide people with what they really need.” Former Mexican President Vincente Fox2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 1Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  5. 5. Methodology3BBased on the findings from the literature, Sonoma County developed a client survey thatasked about 42 unique barriers to self-sufficiency that are related to the seven commonbarrier categories identified in the literature. The survey did not include any open-endedcomment questions. The survey was self-administered and offered in English and Spanish.See Appendix H for a full copy of the survey. The following table illustrates how eachbarrier to self sufficiency was measured on the Sonoma County survey. Barriers to Self Sufficiency As Measured on Sonoma County Survey 1. Employment 1. Weeks worked in past year 2. Hours usually worked each week 3. Pay 4. Knowledge of location of jobs 5. Desire to work 6. Availability of jobs 7. Spouse/partner support of work 8. Prefer/need to stay home with child(ren) 9. Family responsibilities 2. Education 10. Highest level of education 11. Currently in education training 12. Need education or training 3. Housing stability 13. Living arrangement 14. Times moved in past year 15. Reason for last move 16. Shower facilities 17. Phone 18. Permanent address 19. People living with me I wish weren’t 20. Problem finding place to live 4. Stressful experiences 21. Robbed, mugged, attacked 22. Relative/close friend in jail 23. Sexual assault 24. Some close to died/was killed 25. Victim of domestic violence 26. Criminal record 27. Hassled by bill collectors 5. Resources 28. Tools for trade 29. Clothing for work 30. Reliable transportation for work 31. Photo ID/Work Permit 32. Child care problems 6. Child Wellbeing 33. Child’s receipt of school recognitions 34. Child involvement in after-school activities 35. Child receiving special education 36. Child receiving poor grades 37. Child in out-of-home placement 7. Personal and Family Health 38. Physical or mental health problems or disability 39. Alcohol/drug issues 40. Poor health compared to others 41. Child’s health poor compared to others 42. Live with/close to someone with AOD2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 2Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  6. 6. The survey was conducted in June, 2010. All CalWORKs clients visiting the office at 2225Challenger Way in Santa Rosa and scheduled for an interview with their Worker were invitedto complete the survey. Clients visiting the office to drop-off paperwork were also invited tocomplete the survey. Three PRE employees administered the survey to increase objectivityand reduce client anxiety that their answers to the survey would influence their case. Clientscompleted the survey in a conference room to provide some privacy and deposited thesurvey in a locked box. Books were given to children as an incentive for their parents tocomplete the survey.Response RateThe CalWORKs Survey represents client perception at a point in time. As such, the surveyrepresents a sample of all CalWORKs clients at all times. Therefore, inferential statisticalanalysis is used to determine if the responses in the survey are likely to represent theresponses of all clients at all times. Statistical analysis assumes that all individuals of thesample complete the survey to reduce the likelihood of response bias (an over-representation of the opinions from one subgroup). In Research Methods for Social Work, U UAllen Rubin and Earl Babbie (1993) suggest the following rule of thumb about responserates: “A response rate of at least 50 percent is usually considered adequate for analysisand reporting. A response rate of at least 60% is good. And a response rate of 70% is verygood” (page 340).The survey was conducted on the 17 workdays from June 7 through June 30, 2010. Duringthis time, 108 clients had an interview with their Worker. Of these, 99 completed a surveyfor a 92% response rate. In addition, 94 clients who came to the office but did not havean interview with their Worker also completed the survey. The answers from all 193 surveysare reported here. The survey was offered in both English and Spanish. 151 (78.2%) clientscompleted the survey in English. 42 (21.8%) completed the survey in Spanish.Demographics4BThis survey compared the experiences of Sonoma County CalWORKs clients by seven differentdemographic categories (shown on the next page). Where there are statistically significantdifferences in experience between groups of clients who answered the survey, they arereported in the findings. Statistically significant differences are those where the differencesbetween groups in the sample are so large and/or so consistent that HSD can be 97% confidentthat the differences in experience for the survey respondents reflect real differences inexperience for all CalWORKs clients.Compared to the adults on the full CalWORKs caseload in June, 2010, the CalWORKs clientswho completed the survey were significantly different as illustrated below. These differencesmay influence the conclusions drawn from the survey.Characteristic All CalWORKs Survey Clients RespondentsFemale 80% 94% Survey over-represents femalesAge 19-24 25% 20% Survey under-represents clientsAge 45+ 13% 11% ages 19-24 and 45+Latino 24% 37% Survey over-represents LatinoRequired to Work 34% 46% Survey over-represents WTW2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 3Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  7. 7. Survey Client Demographics5B Gender Work Required Male Yes 6% 46% No Female 54% 94% Age Number of Children 45+ 4+ 13% 1 19-24 12% 41% 20% 3 35-44 15% 22% 25-34 40% 2 32% Race/Ethnicity Age of Youngest Child 13-17 0-2 Other 10% 37% Latino 24% 37% 6-12 24% White 3-5 39% 29% Region West 8% Central Approximately 21% of clients who live 79% in the Central region live in zip code South 95407 (Roseland). 3% East See Appendix A for a list of the towns 2% included in each Region. North 8%2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 4Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  8. 8. Results6B90% of CalWORKs clients report three or more barriers to self sufficiency.In the literature, it is clear that TANF recipients have many, severe, and chronic barriersthat impede their ability to achieve self sufficiency. Many authors report that women inpoverty are less healthy, less educated, poorer, have fewer job skills, are more likely to bedepressed, more likely to be addicted to drugs or alcohol, more likely to be victims ofdomestic violence, more likely to have disruptive family responsibilities such as inadequatechildcare, and less likely to have a strong support network (Anderson 2004, DeMarco 2008,Hildebrandt 2006, Latimer 2008, Mauldon 2010, Mulia 2008, Ovwigho 2008). The Women’sEmployment Study (a 1997-2003 examination of barriers to employment among welfaremothers in an urban Michigan County) concluded that women with multiple barriers toobtaining and holding employment are the least likely to obtain economic self sufficiency.7DeMarco (2008) reports that 40-66% of welfare recipients report at least two barriers toemployment while 25% report four or more barriers.8 Furthermore, multiple barriers are notonly associated with poor employment outcomes but are also associated with welfarerecidivism, sanctions, and continuous reliance on public assistanceSonoma County CalWORKs clients self-reported experiences mirror research findings. Inthe 2010 Sonoma County CalWORKs client survey, clients were asked to report whether ornot they are currently or have within the past year experienced any of 42 different barriersto self sufficiency (in 7 different categories). 90% of Sonoma clients in this survey reporthaving recently experienced three or more barriers to self sufficiency. On average, SonomaCounty CalWORKs clients have experienced 8 different barriers to self sufficiency in the pastyear. The following graph summarizes these findings. Details about each barrier categoryand the differences between groups of clients are described on the next page and in the restof the report. Barriers to Self Sufficiency 96% of CalWORKs clients have barriers in 2 or more CATEGORIES On average, CalWORKs clients have barriers in 4 CATEGORIES 100% 96% 75% 62% 61% 59% 58% 50% 48% 45% 25% 0% 8 3 8 7 5 5 5 Employment Education Housing Stressful Resources Child Personal Barriers Barriers Stability Experiences Barriers Wellbeing and Family Barriers Barriers Health Barriers2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 5Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  9. 9. Race 7B Age 10B Education Barriers Education Barriers 78% 77% 66% 64% 55% 47% 38% 19-24 25-34 35-44 45+ White Latino Other Stressful Events Barriers Housing Stability Barriers 80% 75% 67% 63% 61% 43% 41% 19-24 25-34 35-44 45+ White Latino Other Health Barriers Resource Barriers 51% 47% 43% 29% 28% 22% 21% White Latino Other 19-24 25-34 35-44 45+ Child Wellbeing Barriers Required to Work 72% 8B 63% 57% Education Barriers 72% 6% 19-24 25-34 35-44 45+ 49% Health Barriers 59% 55% Work Required Work Exempt Gender,Region 26% 23% 9B No significant differences. 19-24 25-34 35-44 45+2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 6Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  10. 10. Combinations of Barriers1BThere are no common combinations of barriers that are faced by Sonoma CalWORKs clients.Clients reported 65 different combinations of barriers. The most common combinationrepresents 7% of all clients (see below). LEGEND:  blue = barrier,  white = no barrier Child Wellbeing Child Wellbeing # of Barriers # of Barriers Employment Employment % of Clients % of Clients Resources Resources Education Education Housing Housing Health Health Stress Stress 7 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 T=5% 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 6 7 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 2 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 T=18% 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 4 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 T=20% 2 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 2 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 2 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 2 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 T=25% T=7% 4 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 3 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 T=3% 2 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 T=1% 2 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 NOTE: Percents (%) are rounded to the 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 nearest whole number. Therefore the T 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 (total) for each section does not appear to 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 be accurate. T=22%2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 7Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  11. 11. Page intentionally left blank for double-sided printing.2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 8Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  12. 12. Employment Barriers12B96% of CalWORKs clients report barriers to self sufficiency related to employment.Danziger (2001)7 conducted a women’s employment study in Michigan to evaluate the impactof several personal characteristics that might impede employment. Danziger found thatapproximately 33% of the women sampled had one barrier and about 20% had multiplebarriers to employment. Danziger concluded that women who had a greater number of barriersare more likely to have difficulty finding and keeping a job. The most common barriers toemployment were lack of a high school diploma, lack of transportation, few work skills, andmental health related issues.7 Anderson (2004) studied the difficulties women experience afterleaving TANF and found that the inability to maintain work that paid a living wage and the lossof health insurance were the most common reasons that women returned to TANF.1 Andersonalso reported that working is viewed by ex-TANF recipients as a source of pride and a place toform friendships.1 Finally, De Marco (2008) reports that a strong relationship between theparticipant and the worker ... appeared to help participants overcome barriers and receive thesupports needed to attain employment.”8The Sonoma County CalWORKs survey examined eight (8) barriers to self sufficiency relatedto employment. The following graph illustrates the percent of all CalWORKs clients whoreported each barrier related to employment. Not surprisingly, being unemployed and beingunderemployed are the two greatest barriers to self sufficiency. Employment Barriers 4% of clients report 0 barriers related to employment 59% report 1 or 2 barriers related to employment 100% 37% report 3 to 5 barriers related to employment 84% 83% 75% 50% 26% 25% 22% 14% 14% 0% 0% 0% Unemployed When working, No jobs Need to stay Pay too low Dont know Dont want to Spouse 10+ months worked < f ull available home where to f ind work prohibits work time job• FULLY EMPLOYED: 7% of clients reported BOTH being employed more than 10 months in the past year AND when working, working full time.• UNDEREMPLOYED: 9% reported being employed 10+ months in the year but they worked less than full time. • UNEMPLOYED: 9% reported working full time when they were working but for less than 10 months in the past year.• UNEMPLOYED AND UNDEREMPLOYED: 75% reported BOTH being employed less than U U U U 10 months in the past year AND when they were employed, it was less than full time. U U2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 9Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  13. 13. In some cases these barriers are experienced differently by different groups of clients.13BThese statistically significant differences are reported here. Difference by race, gender,region, and age, if any, are included. Differences by age of youngest child and number ofchildren are not included because these differences are related to client age. All data areincluded in Appendices A-G. Required to Work 14B Age 15B Worked <10 months No Jobs Available 97% 89% 80% 75% 20% 7% Work Required Work Exempt 19-24 25-34 35-44 45+ No Jobs Available 50% 37% 16% 13% 19-24 25-34 35-44 45+ Race, Gender, Region 16B No significant differences.2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 10Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  14. 14. Education Barriers17B62% of CalWORKs clients report barriers to self sufficiency related to education.The effectiveness of higher education as a route to self sufficiency has been demonstratedby decades of education and economic research (London, 2006). Crabtree (2010) reportsthat Americans in lower education households earn less and are more than four times morelikely to report health problems than those higher up the socioeconomic ladder.6Additionally, Lee (2009) states that low-skilled and less educated mothers are lesscompetitive in the workforce than those with more education, and therefore, are not aslikely to get high-paying jobs.16 Beyond high school education, London (2006) suggests thathigher education is critical for low income women. Graduating from college is key to reducedpoverty. In Maine, TANF recipients who attended college reported better job opportunities,an increased ability to meet goals, and greater independence.17 London (2006) and Cheng(2007) also report that a mother’s educational attainment is strongly linked to children’sdevelopmental outcomes and educational achievement.The Sonoma County, the CalWORKs survey measured three (3) items related toeducation: highest education level and client’s reported need for education or training.Overall, 30% of clients have less than a high school diploma or a GED and 47% of clientshave a self-reported need for education or training. The graphs at the right illustrate wherethese experiences are statistically different for different groups of clients. Education or Training Barriers 100% 38% of clients report 0 barriers related to education or training 42% report 1 barrier related to education or training 20% report 2 or 3 barriers related to education or training 75% 50% 38% 30% 25% 17% 0% Need Education <Diploma or GED In Education • 54% of clients report they do not need and are not in education or training. • 29% of clients report they need education but do not report that they are in education or training • 17% of clients report they are currently in education or training.2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 11Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  15. 15. In some cases these barriers are experienced differently by different groups of clients.18BThese statistically significant differences are reported here. Difference by race, gender,region, and age, if any, are included. Differences by age of youngest child and number ofchildren are not included because these differences are related to client age. All data areincluded in Appendices A-G. Race 19B Age 20B <Diploma or GED Currently in Education 57% 26% 24% 23% 10% 11% 3% White Latino Other 19-24 25-34 35-44 45+ Required to Work 21B Currently in Education 26% 5% Work Required Work Exempt Gender, Region 2B No significant differences.2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 12Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  16. 16. Housing Stability Barriers23B61% of CalWORKs clients report barriers to self sufficiency related to housing stability.An individual’s use of welfare is clearly impacted by the stability of his/her housing situation,and by the composition of the neighborhood in which he/she can afford to live. Whenindividuals live in poverty and around other people in poverty, they are more likely toremain impoverished. Casciano (2007) argues that ”living in a neighborhood with a greaterconcentration of poor people decreases the social stigma associated with welfare use andalso exposes them to others with experience navigating the welfare system so they are ableto learn the rules governing eligibility, how to navigate the bureaucracy, and how to presentoneself to a case worker to increase the odds of receiving benefits.” When people livearound and associate with people of different and higher economic classes, they are morelikely to improve economically (Casciano, 2007).3The Sonoma County CalWORKs survey measured eight (8) items related to housingstability. As with barriers to self-sufficiency related to employment, these barriers arelargely consistent for all clients. These experiences are fairly consistent among allCalWORKs clients. The following graph illustrates the percent of all CalWORKs who reportedeach housing stability barrier. Housing Stability Barriers 100% 39% of clients report 0 housing stability barriers 41% report 1 or 2 housing stability barriers 19% report 3 to 7 housing stability barriers 75% 50% 38% 37% 25% 21% 19% 14% 3% 2% 1% 0% Moved in Last move Problems Housing not Undesired No No phone No shower past year involuntary finding stable roommates permanent place to live address Involuntary moves include being evicted, losing a home due to non-financial reasons, neighborhood is too dangerous, and divorce or separation. Unstable housing includes living with a friend or family (for instance in a room or garage or shed), living outside, in a car, in a hotel, or in a shelter.2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 13Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  17. 17. In some cases these barriers are experienced differently by different groups of clients.24BThese statistically significant differences are reported here. Difference by race, gender,region, and age, if any, are included. Differences by age of youngest child and number ofchildren are not included because these differences are related to client age. All data areincluded in Appendices A-G. Age 25B Housing Not Stable 38% 19% 16% 8% 19-24 25-34 35-44 45+ Race, Required to Work, Gender, Region 26B No significant differences.2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 14Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  18. 18. Stressful Experiences Barriers27B59% of CalWORKs clients report barriers to self sufficiency related to recent stressful experiences.According to the literature, welfare recipients experience more psychological distress thannon-recipients. Based on the findings from a study comparing the psychological well-beingof current and former TANF recipients, Cheng (2007) concluded that TANF users experiencemore psychological distress than those who do not use TANF and it is possible to infer thatwelfare receipt has a negative effect on psychological well-being.5Another recent study conducted by Hildebrandt (2006) found that single mothers living inpoverty had a higher level of severe and moderate distress than the reference standards forthe general population. 61.8% of women on TANF report feelings of severe distresscompared to only 13.5% of the general population. One TANF recipient in the studydescribes the kinds of stresses she copes with as a result of being in poverty. Other triggersof stress for single mothers living in poverty identified by Hildebrandt (2006) include lack ofsocial support systems, unstable relationships, violence, and abuse. Hildebrandt’s (2006)research found that abuse often turned women’s lives upside-down and impoverishedwomen with responsibility for children had limited options for escaping abusive situations.12Research by Mulia (2008) underscores the “ubiquity of social stressors in poor women’slives”.21 69% of poor women in her study reported at least two stressful life events in thepast year alone including in the areas of economic hardship, neighborhood disorder, andstressful life events.In Sonoma County, a relatively small percent of clients self-reported experiencing eachstressful event recently (in the past year). Recent Stressful Experiences 100% 41% of clients report 0 stressful experiences in the past year 49% report 1 or 2 stressful experiences in the past year 10% report 3 or 4 stressful experiences in the past year 75% 50% 38% 25% 21% 16% 8% 7% 4% 3% 0% Hassled by Relative or Someone Criminal Robbed, Victim of Sexual bill collectors close friend close record mugged, domestic assault in jail died/killed attacked violence2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 15Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  19. 19. In some cases these barriers are experienced differently by different groups of clients.28BThese statistically significant differences are reported here. Difference by race, gender,region, and age, if any, are included. Differences by age of youngest child and number ofchildren are not included because these differences are related to client age. All data areincluded in Appendices A-G. Race 29B Required to Work 30B Someone close died/killed Criminal Record 22% 23% 12% 6% 1% Work Required Work Exempt White Latino Other Hassled by bill collectors 49% 50% 22% White Latino Other Age, Gender, Region 31B No significant differences.2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 16Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  20. 20. Resource Barriers32B58% of CalWORKs clients report barriers to self sufficiency related to resources.Mulia (2008) states, “Researchers have argued that a poor woman’s chances to better hersituation by finding a well-paying job and safer neighborhood may depend upon the socio-economic heterogeneity within her network, particularly her ties to people with far greaterresources and access to opportunity. The nature flow of resources and support within poorwomen’s social networks – the so called private safety net – cannot be counted upon to bufferpoor women from the effects of poverty-related stressors.”21 Other research suggests that oneof the more prominent resource barriers women face is child care related problems. Studiesshow that mothers who are less advantaged in terms of income and education face greaterbarriers to combining work and family, in part because they have poorer access to high quality,reliable child care. Based on a study by Udansky (2008), low-income mothers, mothers whosework shifts vary, mothers who rely on patchwork care, and mothers with little access to socialsupport are likely to experience child care related problems and disruptions in care. Child careproblems represent one avenue through which child-rearing responsibilities hinder women’sability to successfully combine work and family. Care disruptions are likely to entail additionallegwork and stress for mothers, who must arrange backup care and ensure its quality. Missingwork to disruptions can mean using up valuable vacation and personal days or, for lessfortunate mothers, losing pay or even a job.29 In Sonoma County, relatively few clients report resource barriers with the one large exception of child care difficulties. Resource Barriers 100% 42% of clients report 0 barriers related to resources 40% report 1 barriers related to resources 19% report 2 or 3 barriers related to resources 75% 50% 45% 25% 13% 12% 11% 1% 0% Child Care Need transportation Need clothes Need ID/Work Need tools for trade Problems Permit2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 17Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  21. 21. In some cases these barriers are experienced differently by different groups of clients.3BThese statistically significant differences are reported here. Difference by race, gender,region, and age, if any, are included. Differences by age of youngest child and number ofchildren are not included because these differences are related to client age. All data areincluded in Appendices A-G. Race 19B Child Care Problems Need ID or Work Permit 64% 42% 39% 27% 5% 0% White Latino Other White Latino Other Age, Required to Work, Gender, Region 34B No significant differences. Child Care Problems 47% 35% 25% 18% 13% 13% 11% Cost No relatives Quality Cant find Too far Not Trust dependableOf the 45% of clients who report child care problems, the most common problem is cost35B(47% of those with a child care problem). 49% report only 1 problem and 25% report twoproblems. The other 26% report 3 or more child care problems. The only common groupingof problems is Cost and No Relative which is reported by 10% of clients with child careproblems. No other combination of problems is reported by more than 2 clients.There are no significant differences in the child care problems reported by clients who are or36B U Uwho are not required to work. Furthermore, there are no significant differences in reported U Uchild care problems by any demographic grouping.2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 18Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  22. 22. Child Wellbeing Barriers37B48% of CalWORKs clients report barriers to self sufficiency related to child wellbeing.Maternal welfare receipt has been found to have significant impacts on outcomes forchildren. According to Mauldon (2010), children in child-only TANF cases (who’s caregiverreceives SSI), have poorer health and more behavior problems at school than children inother TANF families.19 Interestingly, this finding is mitigated when the family receiveshousing assistance through Section 8 Housing Voucher. The Women’s Employment Study(Danziger, 2000) has documented that women who move from welfare reliance to workdemonstrate a decrease in harsh parenting, an increase in positive parenting, and adecrease in behavior problems among their children (although these children still havehigher than average levels of behavior problems).7 Kalil (2007) has also researched therelationship between mothers formerly receiving welfare who are able overcome chronicpoverty and the wellbeing of their children. Her findings demonstrate that for mothers thatleft welfare and escaped poverty, their children had higher achievement scores and fewerbehavioral problems.13 However, the relationship between welfare policies and childwellbeing is not universally supported. Dunifon (2006) analyzed welfare policies, outcomesand models over the years and report “the results from this study do not present a clearpicture of a consistent association between welfare policies and parenting behavior or childwellbeing.”10In Sonoma County, the CalWORKs survey measured five (5) items related to childwellbeing. Surprisingly, there are not differences between different groups of clients relatedto these items. Child Wellbeing Barriers 100% 52% of clients report 0 barriers related to child wellbeing 35% report 1 or 2 barriers related to child wellbing 13% report 3 or 4 pbarriers related to child wellbeing 75% 57% 50% 50% 25% 23% 23% 1% 0% No school No extra-curricular Special education Poor grades Out-of-home recognitions activities placement NOTE: Except for out-of-home placement, the graph above only includes those 38B clients with a child ages 6-17.2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 19Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  23. 23. In some cases these barriers are experienced differently by different groups of clients.39BThese statistically significant differences are reported here. Difference by race, gender,region, and age, if any, are included. Differences by age of youngest child and number ofchildren are not included because these differences are related to client age. All differencesare included in Appendices A-G. Age, Race, Required to Work, Gender, Region 40B There are NO significant differences related by child wellbeing 41B by any demographic grouping. 42B2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 20Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  24. 24. Personal and Family Health Barriers43B45% of CalWORKs clients report barriers to self sufficiency related to personal and family health.Significant health problems have been identified in the population served by TANF.Hildenbrandt (2006) has observed that TANF recipients are less healthy, less educated, andpoorer than impoverished women who have never been on welfare, and they experiencehigher levels of depression and domestic violence than women in the general population. Ina Connecticut state survey of women on welfare, 20% reported physical health problems,20% reported poor general health, and 27% reported considerable depressive symptoms.These rates were double those found among similarly aged women not on welfare. In anethnographic study of 256 impoverished families, 87% of the mothers reported mentalhealth problems based on diagnoses by mental health professionals, and 52% of thefamilies reported concurrent mental and physical health problems in both the primarycaregiver and at least one of the children. The researchers also found that low-incomemothers who had their own health problems were 25% more likely to apply for TANF, andlow-income mothers with children who had activity limitations in addition to their chronicillness were 60% more likely to apply for TANF.12 Children of women on welfare also bare adisproportionate burden of poor health. Hildenbrandt (2006) reports that 3% of Americanpreschool children are in poor health compared to 8% of preschool children in TANFhousehold.12The Sonoma County CalWORKs survey measured five (5) items related to personal andfamily health. Personal or Family Health Barriers 100% 56% of clients report 0 barriers related to health 38% report 1 or 2 barriers related to health 6% report 3 barriers related to health 75% 50% 27% 23% 25% 12% 5% 4% 0% My health poor Physical, mental Living with/close to Childs health poor Alcohol or Drug compared to health problems someone with AOD compared to problems others others2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 21Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  25. 25. In some cases these barriers are experienced differently by different groups of clients.4BThese statistically significant differences are reported here. Difference by race, gender,region, and age, if any, are included. Differences by age of youngest child and number ofchildren are not included because these differences are related to client age. All differencesare included in Appendices A-G. Race 45B Age 46B Personal Health Problems Personal Health Problems 56% 40% 38% 25% 9% 9% 10% White Latino Other 19-24 25-34 35-44 45+ Live with person with AOD Gender and Region 47B Alcohol/Drug Problems 19% 14% 5% White Latino Other 18% 4% Female Male Required to Work, Region 48B No significant differences. 49B2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 22Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  26. 26. Findings and Practice ImplicationsThese findings and practice implications were developed with, and represent a consensusamong Sonoma County CalWORKs management.FINDING 1: The most significant finding of this study is that Sonoma County CalWORKsclients have many and varied barriers to self-sufficiency. This mirrors the findings inpublished research that TANF recipients have many, severe, and chronic barriers thatimpede their ability to achieve self sufficiency and that women with multiple barriers toobtaining and holding employment are the least likely to obtain economic self sufficiency.90% of Sonoma County CalWORKs clients have three or more barriers to self-sufficiency.And there are no common clusters of barriers. As expected, 96% of CalWORKs clients reportthat employment is their primary barrier to self-sufficiency. There is some commonalityregarding school engagement -- 57% of clients with school-aged children report that theirchild has not received recognitions at school and 50% report that their child is not involvedin extra-curricular activities. Beyond this, there is no single barrier to self-sufficiency (out of42 different barriers) that is reported by a majority of clients. PRACTICE IMPLICATION: The Sonoma County CalWORKs program seeks to meet the needs of individual clients. This finding reinforces the reality that there is no one-size- fits-all approach to helping clients successfully achieve self sufficiency. The CalWORKs program will continue, and even strengthen, this individual approach for each client. PRACTICE IMPLICATION: Because CalWORKs clients have such a wide variety of needs, this finding also validates the importance of the collaborate philosophy of the CalWORKs program. Several staff from other organizations are currently co-located at the CalWORKs program: Alcohol and Other Drug Counselors, Mental Health Counselors, and a Domestic Violence Victim Advocate. The CalWORKs program also works with many other partners who provide services throughout the County to CalWORKS clients, including Goodwill, the Center for Social and Environmental Stewardship, West County Community Services, Petaluma People Services Center, Sonoma County Legal Aid, and Santa Rosa Junior College. The CalWORKs program will continue to work on enhancing a wide array of services available to clients. PRACTICE IMPLICATION: To explore whether or not a different approach to CalWORKs case management can make a difference in client self sufficiency, the Sonoma County CalWORKs program will test the effect of limiting caseload sizes.FINDING 2: The literature cited for housing stability barriers and resource barriershighlights how poverty, neighborhood, and networks can hinder or promote an individual’sability to achieve self sufficiency. Casciano (2007) explains that “when people live aroundand associate with people of different and higher economic classes, they are more likely toimprove economically.”3 PRACTICE IMPLICATION: One benefit provided by the Subsidized Employee Program (SEP), funded with federal stimulus funding, was providing CalWORKs clients an opportunity to network with and receive mentoring from individuals of different and higher economic classes. With SEP, CalWORKs clients were able to experience the role of “employee” and increase their confidence in their ability to be successfully employed. In Sonoma County, 142 CalWORKs clients obtained permanent employment through SEP. Stimulus funding is no longer available for SEP. The CalWORKs program management will continue to explore ideas to provide subsidized employment opportunities for CalWORKs clients.2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 23Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  27. 27. FINDING 3: Housing stability is clearly a barrier for many CalWORKs clients. 61% of clientsreport one or more housing stability barriers. PRACTICE IMPLICATION: The CalWORKs program will seek opportunities to partner with other organizations to improve housing supports for CalWORKs recipients. For instance, management will explore whether or not it may be possible to provide priority to CalWORKs clients for Section 8 Housing Vouchers.FINDING 4: The findings related to child care are surprising. Although CalWORKs ancillaryservices includes funding for childcare, 45% of clients still report child care problems withinthe past year. And, 47% of these clients report that cost is a problem. Furthermore, clientsrequired to work are no more or less likely to report child care barriers than those clientswho are not required to work. PRACTICE IMPLICATION: Effective child care support is a high priority for the CalWORKs program. Program staff will identify ways to more fully understand the child care barriers experienced by CalWORKs clients. For instance, the program may conduct focus groups or a short follow-up survey administered by Workers. This information will help the program to make changes that are most likely to reduce this barrier for clients.FINDING 5: 43% of CalWORKs families with school-aged children report that their child orchildren have received some sort of school-based recognition. This finding is good news. Itwould be interesting to know how this compares to the whole community. PRACTICE IMPLICATION: The CalWORKs program will continue to promote the importance of child wellbeing and will identify ways to further promote school engagement for families with school-aged children. PRACTICE IMPLICATION: CalWORKs program management discussed the relationship between school recognitions after-school activities to child well-being and to parent self sufficiency. Management will continue studying published literature and talk to staff to more fully understand this concept.FINDING 6: Fewer CalWORKs clients than expected reported recent stressful experiences.However, 38% do report being hassled by bill collectors in the past year. PRACTICE IMPLICATION: The CalWORKs program will explore the feasibility of providing consumer credit counseling support for CalWORKs clients.FINDING 7: Many of the barriers to self sufficiency experienced by CalWORKs clients aredifferent for clients of different racial and ethnic backgrounds, and for clients in different agecategories. And, although this report does not compare the incidence of these barriers asexperienced by CalWORKs clients to the incidence experienced by the whole community, itis clear from the published literature that poverty is a significant contributing factor to thenumber of and complexity of difficulties that CalWORKs client face on a daily basis. PRACTICE IMPLICATION: The Sonoma County Human Services Department is committed to advocating for the elimination of inequalities. Examples of this commitment are the Department’s sponsorship of the Upstream Investments Project, and participation in First 5, Health Action, Prevent Child Abuse Sonoma, the Santa Rosa Mayor’s Gang Prevention Task Force, and ongoing collaboration with the Department of Health Services to mitigate the social determinants of health (disparities related to poverty, race, and class). The Department will continue these activities with the belief that providing equal opportunities to children, families and individuals is the most effective way to promote maximum independence and well-being for all.2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 24Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  28. 28. References1. Anderson, S., Halter, A., & Gryzlak, B. (2004). Difficulties after leaving TANF: Inner- city women talk about reasons for returning to welfare. SocialWork 49(2), 185-194. Retrieved from http://www.socialworkers.org/sections2. Bartle, E., & Segura, G. (2003). Welfare policy, welfare participants, and CalWORKS caseworkers: How participants are informed of supportive services. Journal of Poverty 7(1/2), 141-161; and: Rediscovering the Other America: The Continuing Crisis of Poverty and Inequality in the United States (ed: Keith M. Kilty, and Elizabeth A. Segal) The Haworth Press, Inc., 2003, pp 141 - 161.3. Casciano, R, & Massey, D. (2007). Neighborhoods, employment, and welfare use: Assessing the influence of neighborhood socioeconomic composition. Social Sciences Research 37(2), 544-558.4. Cheng, T. (2002). Welfare recipients: How do they become independent? Social Work Research 26(3), 159-170.5. Cheng, T. (2007). Impact of work requirements on the psychological well-being of TANF recipients. Health & Social Work 32(1), 41-48.6. Crabtree, S. (April 28, 2010). Income, Education Levels Combine to Predict Health Problems. Gallup. Retrieved May 20, 2010, from http://www.gallup.com/poll/127532/Income-Education-Levels-Combine-Predict-Health- Problems.aspx7. Danziger, S. (2000). Womens Employment Study. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, School of Social Work. Retrieved on May 18, 2010, from http://www.researchforum.org/project_printable_100.html8. De Marco, A., Austin, M., & Chow, J. (2008). Making the transition from welfare to work: Employment experiences of CalWORKS participants in the San Francisco Bay area. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment 18(4), 414-440. doi10.1080/109113508024868099. Dillman, D. (2006). Why choice of survey mode makes a difference. Public Health Reports 121(1), 11-13. Retrieved August 5, 2010 from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2005690910. Dunifon, R., Hynes, K., & Peters, E. (2006). Welfare reform and child well-being. Children and Youth Services Review 28 (11), 1273-1292. doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2006.01.00511. Grossi, E., Groth, N., Mosconi, P., Cerutti, R., Pace, F., Compare, A., et al. (2006). Development and validation of the short version of hte psychological general well-being index (PGWB-S). Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 4:88. Retrieved from http://www.hqlo.com/content/4/1/88. doi: 10.1.186/1477-7525-4-8812. Hildebrandt, E. (2006). Women who did not succeed in the work-based welfare program. Policy, Politics, & Nursing 7(1), 23-34. Retreived May 8, 2010, from http://ppn.sagepub.com doi: 10.117/15271544052853962010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 25Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  29. 29. 13. Kalil, A., & Dunifon, R. (2007). Maternal work and welfare use and child well-being: Evidence from 6 years of data from the womens employment study. Children and Youth Services Review 29(6), 742-761. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com14. Latimer, M. (2008). A view from the bottom: Former welfare recipients evaluate the system. Journal of Poverty 12(1), 77-101. doi: 10.1080/1087554080196794015. Lee, K. (2009). Impact of the 1996 welfare reform on child and family well-being. Journal of Community Psychology 37(5), 602-617. doi: 10.1002/jcop.2032016. Lee, M., Singelmann, J., & Yom-Tov, A. (2008). Welfare myths: The transmission of values and work among TANF families. Social Science Research 37(2), 516-529. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com17. London, R. (2006). The role of postsecondary education in welfare recipients paths to self-sufficiency. The Journal of Higher Education 77(3), 472-496.18. Marlar, J. (2010, March 9). The Emotional Cost of Underemployment. Gallup. Retrieved May 20, 2010, from http://www.gallup.com/poll/126518/Emotional-Cost- Underemployment.aspx?version=print19. Mauldon, J., Speiglman, R., & Sogar, C. (2010). SSI Parent CalWORKS Families...on the Edge (August). San Francisco, CA: Child & Family Policy Institute of California20. Mendes, E. & Ray, J. (2010, March 26). Mexico’s Fox talks about why leaders need wellbeing data. Gallup. Retrieved May 20, 2010, from http://www.gallup.com/poll/127391/Mexico-Fox-Talks-Why-Leaders-Need-Wellbeing- Data.aspx21. Mulia, N., Schmidt, L., Bond, J., Jacobs, L., & Korcha, R. (2008). Stress, social support and problem drinking among women in poverty. Addiction 103(8), 1283-1293. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008.02234.x22. Ovwigho, P., Saunders, C., & Born, C. (2008). Barriers to independence among TANF recipients: Comparing caseworker records and client surveys. Administration in Social Work 32(3), 84-110. doi:10.108./0364310080192266223. Ozawa, M., & Hong-Sik, Y. (2005). "Leavers" from TANF and AFDC: How do they fare economically? Social Work 50(3), 249.24. Preamble to the Constitution of the World Health Organization as adopted by the International Health Conference, New York, 19 June - 22 July 1946; signed on 22 July 1946 by the representatives of 61 States (Official Records of the World Health Organization, no. 2, p. 100) and entered into force on 7 April 1948. The definition has not been amended since 1948.25. Rath, T., & Harter, J. (May 12, 2010). Wellbeing: What you Need to Thrive. Gallup. Retrieved May 13, 2010, from http://www.gallup.com/content/12764326. Rath, T., & Harter, K. (May 4, 2010). The Five Essential Elements of Wellbeing: What differentiates a thriving life from one spend suffering? Gallup. Retrieved May 13, 2010, from http://www.gallup.com/content/1268842010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 26Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  30. 30. 27. Saad, L. (April 16, 2010). Making Ends Meet is a Threshold for Personal Wellbeing. Gallup. Retrieved May 20, 2010, from http://www.gallup.com/poll/127391/Making- Ends-Meet-Threshold-Personal-Wellbeing.aspx28. Witters, D., & Mendes, E. (2010, May 10). Holland, Mich., Metro Area Best at Meeting Basic Needs. Gallup. Retrieved May 20, 2010, from http://www.gallup.com/poll/12777829. Udansky, ML. and Wolf, DA. (2008, May 8). When Child Care Breaks Down: Mother’s Experiences with Child Care Problems and Resulting Missed Work. Journal of Family Issues 2008;29;1185.Wellbeing Surveys Reviewed1. Psychological General Well-Being Index/Scale (2006) National Center for Health Statistics Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Hyattsville MD2. WHO-Five Well-Being Index (1998) World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe Copenhagen, Denmark3. The Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Survey (2008) The Bendheim-Thoman Center for Research on Child Wellbeing Princeton University Princeton, NJ Columbia Population Research Center Columbia University New York, NY4. Work and Health Survey (2000) Field Research Corporation San Francisco CA5. California Work and Health Survey (1998) Field Research Corporation San Francisco CA6. Northern Ireland Health and Social Wellbeing Survey (2005) Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency Belfast, Ireland7. The Bay Area Family Well-Being Survey: Sonoma County The SPHERE Institute Burlingame, CA8. Sonoma County Homeless Census and Survey (2009) Applied Survey Research Watsonville, CA2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 27Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  31. 31. 9. Well-Being Questionnaire (2010) Reader’s Digest rd.com10. California Well-Being Studies: SSI Parent CalWORKs Study (2010) Child and Family Policy Institute of California Oakland CA11. Women’s Employment Study (1997-2003) University of Michigan Poverty Research and Training Center Ann Arbor, MI12. Survey of Income and Program Participation (2004) U.S. Census Bureau U.S. Department of Commerce Washington, DC2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 28Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  32. 32. Appendix A: Towns included in each Region Central Santa Rosa Rohnert Park Cotati North Calistoga Cloverdale Geyserville Healdsburg Windsor Fulton East Boyes Hot Springs Eldridge El Verano Glen Ellen Kenwood Sonoma Vineburg South Penngrove Petaluma West Bodega Bodega Bay Valley Ford Annapolis Camp Meeker Cazedero Duncan Mills Forestville Graton Gualala Guerneville Jenner Monte Rio Occidental Rio Nido Sebastopol Stewarts Point Villa Grande Sea Ranch2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 29Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)
  33. 33. Appendix B: All Responses by Percent Did Not Answer % of those Questions on % did not that didBarrier to Self Sufficiency Survey answer answerEmployment Barriers NA NA 96%1. Unemployed 10+ months 1 4.7% 83.4%2. When working, worked < full time 2 4.25 84.1%3. No jobs available 3 0.0% 25.8%4. Need to stay home 3 0.0% 22.1%5. Pay too low 3 0.0% 13.7%6. Don’t know where to find job 3 0.0% 13.7%7. Don’t want to work 3 0.0% 0.0%8. Spouse prohibits work 3 0.0% 0.0%Education Barriers NA NA 62%1. < Diploma or GED 4 3.2% 31.0%2. Need education/training 3 0.0% 38.4%3. In education/training 3 0.0% 16.8%Housing Stability Barriers NA NA 61%1. Moved in past year 9 7.4% 38.1%2. Last move involuntary 10 0.0% 36.8%3. Problems finding place to live 7h 0.0% 21.1%4. Housing not stable 8 2.6% 19.5%5. Undesired roommates 7c 0.0% 14.2%6. No permanent address 3 0.0% 2.6%7. No phone 3 0.0% 1.6%8. No shower 3 0.0% 0.5%Recent Stressful Experiences NA NA 59%1. Hassled by bill collectors 7i 0.0% 38.4%2. Relative or close friend in jail 7b 0.0% 21.1%3. Someone close died/killed 7e 0.0% 16.3%4. Criminal record 3 0.0% 7.9%5. Robbed, mugged, attacked 7a 0.0% 6.8%6. Victim of domestic violence 7f 0.0% 4.2%7. Sexual assault 7d 0.0% 3.2%Resource Barriers NA NA 58%1. Child care problems 3 or 11 0.0% 44.2%2. Need transportation 3 0.0% 13.2%3. Need clothes 3 0.0% 11.6%4. Need ID/Work permit 3 0.0% 11.1%5. Need tools for trade 3 0.0% 1.1%Child Wellbeing Barriers NA NA 48%1. No school recognitions 12 0.0% 56.6%2. No extra-curricular activities 12 0.0% 50.4%3. Special education 12 0.0% 23.0%4. Poor grades 12 0.0% 23.0%5. Out-of-home placement 12 0.0% 1.1%Personal and Family Health Barriers NA NA 45%1. My health poor compared to others 5 7.9% 26.9%2. Physical, mental health problems 3 0.0% 23.2%3. Living with/close to someone with AOD 7g 0.0% 12.1%4. Child’s health poor compared to others 6 5.3% 5.6%5. Alcohol or drug problems 3 0.0% 4.2%NA = Not Applicable2010 CalWORKs Survey Report Page 30Sonoma County Human Services Department, Marla Stuart (707-565-5849 or mstuart1@schsd.org)

×